Patients' perspectives of a pharmacist-provided clinical pharmacogenomics service

Pharmacogenetic testing and counselling in the community pharmacy: mixed-methods study of a new pharmacist-led service

BACKGROUND

Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing and counselling (short: PGx service) in the community pharmacy is not routinely practiced. We propose a comprehensive pharmacist-led service where PGx information is integrated into medication reviews.

AIM

To evaluate the pharmacist-led service comprising PGx testing and counselling (PGx service) from the perspective of patients.

METHOD

For this mixed-methods study, we conducted two follow-up interviews F1 and F2 with patients recruited for the PGx service in a community pharmacy after 1st of January 2020. The semi-structured interviews were held by phone call and covered understanding of PGx, the implementation of recommendations, handling of PGx documents (list of concerned substances and PGx recommendation), gain in medication knowledge, and willingness to pay for the PGx service.

RESULTS

We interviewed 25 patients in F1 and 42 patients in F2. Patients were generally able to understand and use results of the PGx service. At least one PGx recommendation was implemented for 69% of the patients. Handling of PGx documents ranged from patients having forgotten about the PGx results to patients consulting the list for every medication-related decision; the latter often expecting negative effects. Finally, 62% of the patients were willing to pay for the PGx service.

CONCLUSION

For future PGx testing and counselling, HCPs should consider the patients' health literacy in a standardized way and use adequate communication skills to enhance the patient's understanding in PGx and to attenuate potential negative expectations.

Pharmacogenomics implementation across multiple clinic settings: a qualitative evaluation

Aim: To advance clinical adoption and implementation of pharmacogenomics (PGx) testing, barriers and facilitators to these efforts must be understood. This study identified and examined barriers and facilitators to active implementation of a PGx program across multiple clinic settings in an academic healthcare system. Materials & methods: 28 contributors to the PGx implementation (e.g., clinical providers, informatics specialists) completed an interview to elicit their perceptions of the implementation. Results: Qualitative analysis identified several barriers and facilitators that spanned different stages of the implementation process. Specifically, unclear test payment mechanisms, decision support tool development, rigid workflows and provider education were noted as barriers to the PGx implementation. A multidisciplinary implementation team and leadership support emerged as key facilitators. Furthermore, participants also suggested strategies to overcome or maintain these factors. Conclusion: Assessing real-world implementation perceptions and suggested strategies from a range of implementation contributors facilitates a more comprehensive framework and best-practice guidelines for PGx implementation.

Intersection and Considerations for Patient-Centered Care, Patient Experience, and Medication Experience in Pharmacogenomics

As healthcare continues to embrace the concept of person- and patient-centered care, pharmacogenomics, patient experience, and medication experience will continue to play an increasingly important role in care delivery. This review highlights the intersection between these concepts and provides considerations for patient-centered medication and pharmacogenomic experiences. Elements at the patient, provider, and system level can be considered in the discussion, supporting the use of pharmacogenomics, with components of the patient and medication experience contributing to the mitigation of barriers surrounding patient use and the valuation of pharmacogenomic testing.

The Critical Role of Pharmacists in the Clinical Delivery of Pharmacogenetics in the U.S

Since the rebirth of pharmacogenomics (PGx) in the 1990s and 2000s, with new discoveries of genetic variation underlying adverse drug response and new analytical technologies such as sequencing and microarrays, there has been much interest in the clinical application of PGx testing. The early involvement of pharmacists in clinical studies and the establishment of organizations to support the dissemination of information about PGx variants have naturally resulted in leaders in clinical implementation. This paper presents an overview of the evolving role of pharmacists, and discusses potential challenges and future paths, primarily focused in the U.S. Pharmacists have positioned themselves as leaders in clinical PGx testing, and will prepare the next generation to utilize PGx testing in their scope of practice.

Exploring perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes regarding pharmacogenetic testing in the medically underserved

Introduction: Pharmacogenetic testing may hold promise in addressing health disparities, as medically underserved patients appear to be prescribed medications with pharmacogenetic guidelines at higher rates. While routine clinical implementation of testing in medically underserved populations has not yet been achieved, using patient perspectives to inform implementation should increase the likelihood of success. The aim of this study was to assess the perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes regarding pharmacogenetic testing in medically underserved patients. Methods: We developed a survey instrument to assess respondent views on pharmacogenetic testing. The survey instrument was developed through a process of literature review, expert input, iterative pilot testing, and final refinement. The survey instrument was fielded to US adults with an estimated household income of $42,000 per year or less. Results: During the survey instrument development, 59 pilot testers provided 133 comments which lead to 38 revisions to the survey instrument. The nationwide survey resulted in 1,060 respondents, of which half (49.8%) reported having no health insurance or being on Medicaid. Most patients (78.9%) had not previously heard of pharmacogenetic testing. After being provided an explanation of pharmacogenetic testing, 60.5% were very or moderately interested in receiving testing if there were no cost and 75.8% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that pharmacogenetic testing should be available to help with medication selection regardless of cost. Respondents shared that their greatest concern with pharmacogenetic testing was that the test would cost them money, which was expressed by over half (52.7%). This was followed by concerns that the results could reveal a risk for a disease, could affect health insurance, and would not improve care. Discussion: Our results indicate a strong interest in pharmacogenetic testing and identify key perceptions, attitudes, concerns, and potential barriers that can be addressed as pharmacogenetic testing is clinically implemented in medically underserved patient populations.

A Theory-Informed Systematic Review of Barriers and Enablers to Implementing Multi-Drug Pharmacogenomic Testing

PGx testing requires a complex set of activities undertaken by practitioners and patients, resulting in varying implementation success. This systematic review aimed (PROSPERO: CRD42019150940) to identify barriers and enablers to practitioners and patients implementing pharmacogenomic testing. We followed PRISMA guidelines to conduct and report this review. Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PubMed Central were systematically searched from inception to June 2022. The theoretical domain framework (TDF) guided the organisation and reporting of barriers or enablers relating to pharmacogenomic testing activities. From the twenty-five eligible reports, eleven activities were described relating to four implementation stages: ordering, facilitating, interpreting, and applying pharmacogenomic testing. Four themes were identified across the implementation stages: IT infrastructure, effort, rewards, and unknown territory. Barriers were most consistently mapped to TDF domains: memory, attention and decision-making processes, environmental context and resources, and belief about consequences.